Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 16:58:07 06/05/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 05, 2001 at 19:44:46, william penn wrote: >On June 05, 2001 at 18:41:03, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On June 05, 2001 at 18:14:16, william penn wrote: >>[snip] >>>So when did "being polite", and "taking the time to answer questions" amount to >>>being a good programmer who should be listened to?????:, in your response you >>>just gave me the key to understanding why someone who has accomplished so little >>>in computer chess has gotten so much respect. >> >>Yes. I have to agree. Being the world champion with Cray Blitz is nothing >>much. Having the undisputably strongest open source program in the world >>[crafty] -- small peanuts. Winning the previous CCT -- a fluke. The wide >>respect he garners from the chess programming world -- smoke an mirrors. >> >>I just can't understand why anyone would listen to him. >> >>>I AM SPEAKING COMPARATIVELY >>>OFCOURSE. >> >>Compared to what? > >Well dan if you would listen carefully, i am not saying the man does not have >talent, or the man is not smart, what i am saying is compared to other here like >shoerder and therton and ban, he should not get the respect that they do, but >yet, he was able to run amir ban off this board. You really believe that Amir Ban is afraid of Robert Hyatt? He posts here whenever he likes. >Crafty although good, has never > been as strong as rebel , or hiarcs, or fritz, or even geniusl. Err... Those are all professional programs, developed and maintained by an orgainization where all their waking hours are devoted to writing chess programs. Crafty is an after-hours project from a college professor who has classes to teach and papers to publish. Since his code is open source, it is patently obvious that it can never stay stronger than programs whose code is hidden. They can easily incorporate any of his ideas that they choose and he cannot incorporate any of their ideas unless they decide to divulge them. And despite all of this, his program recently won a CCT contest with a large number of professional programs entered. >I never said >that hyatt does not know computer chess, what i have said is that others with >more expierence have said things differently, amir said he believes computers >are gm's also, shroeder, and the hiarcs programmer, but according to hyatt they >are "lying" for some promotional thing. Provide a quotation for this. You are simply making it up. What he has said (and I agree with) it that it has not been proven that computers are GM's. It has also not been proven that they aren't. I think the evidence leads towards the latest crop being of that level. But if the GM's study them things may change. >HYATT, HAS NEVER produced any statistics >that show computers are not performing on the GM, LEVEL. Most of his arguments >are subjective, based on his limited expierences on icc. HAVE you noticed no >other programmer spends the time at icc as hyatt, what does this mean???, I believe that it is his program that spends copious hours on ICC. He has two systems that run (basically unattended most of the time probably) which play chess on the internet. Why should that concern you in the slightest? > i will >let you guess. I MEAN NO PROFESSIONAL COMMERICAIL PROGRAMMER. If professional commercial programmers played chess on ICC would that be a bad thing? I suspect you will find that commercial programs do play on ICC -- though perhaps not manned by their programmers. There is a reason for that. If an "official" presence gets bashed by an inferior program it will look bad. People are profoundly ignorant about things of that nature and the marketing folks might huddle in fear over such a prospect. Despite all of this, there are some who are willing to take a risk from time to time. And certainly we do have the good examples of Ed and Amir in taking on human opponents. Anyway, I'm not really sure why I'm responding. Just stupid, I guess.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.